It’s ironic how the anti-gun crowd tries to hold firearm manufacturers responsible for deaths that involve their guns but claim no responsibility for the deaths of innocent people who were rendered unarmed and helpless due to restrictive gun laws.
The political left is always using “mass shootings” as justification for more gun control laws. The propaganda and media hype behind so-called “gun violence” is nothing more than fake rhetoric created for the purpose of gaining support for more gun regulations. The idea that the gun-grabbers continue to push is that “if the killer didn’t have a gun, he wouldn’t kill.” This couldn’t be further from the truth and has been proven to be a false claim time and time again.
The term “mass shootings” is a propaganda term that was created by a man named Mark Bryant, a 66-year-old retired computer systems analyst. Bryant is also the founder of “The Gun Violence Archive” (GVA) and claims to have coined the term as if it was something to be proud of, regardless of the fact that it is a misleading term designed to give only four people hit by a bullet, the appearance of being a much larger event. Bryant has been accused of including gang-related shootings and home invasions in his “studies.” Of course, he would. Bryant has claimed his group views hundreds of websites a day seeking gun-related incidents. It would appear that if those incidents can be used and compiled to contribute to the anti-gun hysteria, GVA will document them, and left-wing media sources will use them as “reliable” data from a “reputable” source. Bryant has admitted that in his data research, he has made mistakes as extreme as reporting a victim as an adult male when it was really a female child, yet anti-gun lobby groups, left-wing politicians, and anti-2nd Amendment Activists will use Bryant’s data to alter the firearm narrative.
What the media won’t tell you is that violence is never the result of a gun, but anytime a gun is used, they will position it as the cause. There is no such thing as “gun violence.”
For example, Australia had two major gun bans under the guise of preventing suicide, yet after the bans, the trajectory of the suicide rate didn’t change. Giffords is notorious for pushing a false narrative that guns shoot all by themselves.
England is virtually a gun free zone, but continues to experience violence and bloodshed, although guns have essentially been banned. A comparison study was done on London and New York City, resulting in the fact that London exceeded New York City in murder in 2018. In those killings, guns were replaced with knives. This proves that violence does not decrease in the absence of guns. Many would argue violence increases in the absence of good people being able to carry a gun in public.
Recently, in Sydney, Australia, a man stabbed six people to death at a shopping center. During the attack, shoppers fled for their lives, and no one shot back. The reason no one shot back was because everyone had been disarmed. It was a gun free zone, but apparently, the killer didn’t read the sign.
A similar situation played out recently at a concert hall in Moscow,Russia. Several were killed because they couldn’t defend themselves.
The idea of disarming lawful citizens as an attempt to stop violence is an absurdity, yet we continue to have conversations with those who perpetuate such nonsense. We have learned that gun free zones are of the deadliest places on earth, yet left-wing politicians, anti-gun groups and uninformed American citizens, continue to push for more of these killing zones.
Some conversations about holding anti-gun legislators and lobby groups, like Mom’s Demand Action, Everytown For Gun Safety, Gifford’s Group, and March For Our Lives, accountable for deaths due to self-defense restricting gun laws, are starting to occur. Do we think those who disarm American Citizens and block access to self-defense should be responsible for the deaths and damage they contribute to? Statistics show that most of the gun-related deaths occur in gun free zones. The reason is obvious. When good people are disarmed, bad guys are emboldened.
If someone cuts the brake lines on your car, should they be held accountable for any death or injury that occurs? That death or injury was a direct and intended result of their actions. Their actions caused you to be unable to stop your car. The same is true for gun control laws. The actions of the anti-gun activists and lobbyists are intended to keep you unarmed and result in you not being able to protect yourself in public. Anti-gun activists keep Americans unarmed, and criminals take advantage of the situation.
About Dan Wos, Author – Good Gun Bad Guy
Dan Wos is available for Press Commentary. For more information, contact PR HERE
Dan Wos is a nationally recognized 2nd Amendment advocate, Host of The Loaded Mic and Author of the “GOOD GUN BAD GUY” book series. He speaks at events, is a contributing writer for many publications, and can be found on radio stations across the country. Dan has been a guest on Newsmax, the Sean Hannity Show, Real America’s Voice, and several others. Speaking on behalf of gun-rights, Dan exposes the strategies of the anti-gun crowd and explains their mission to disarm law-abiding American gun-owners.
The antiConstitutional enemy combatants who draft Communist, antiConsitutional legislation should definitely be sued into oblivion, so much so that their great great grandchildren can’t afford pink hair dye. And imprison them for 10 years and ban them from holding any public office for life.
Also, those that push these illegal restrictions need to pay to defend them out of their own pocket instead of using tax payer money.
ship them to venezuela let them eat dirt because there is no food
Politicians aid and abet criminals by creating gun free murder zones. These treasonous human garbage, such as joe Biden who pushed the first school gun free zone, should be jailed 20 years for every murder in a zone they voted for. If 300 reps voted for the zone, all 300 get their behinds abused in the showers for 20 years!
I like that idea!
Accountability for our reps, politicians and elected leaders? Hah! Rainbows and unicorns.
no soap just sand
If we’re talking treason, and certainly that abounds, I believe they don’t deserve 3 hots & a cot for the rest of their lives. I say send’em to Gitmo, build a gallows, then put the executions on pay-per view. Reduce the national debt and at the same time allow people to see with their own eyes the consequences of overthrowing our Republic. Just like it was in the Old West when everyone in the territory would turn out for execution day.
We are both on the same page. Hangtown/Placerville kommiefornia style.
Yes they should be. The same should happen to business owners who ban carry on their premises.
Amen
At a basic minimum, if you own a business that is open to the public, potential customers walking in off the street should not be disarmed.
Employess should not be disarmed either, but thst is a different discussion.
The best way to hurt anti-gun establishments is to not spend money there. If everyone did this, they will either change their tune RFN, or go bankrupt!
I have this on a business card. Anytime I encounter a 2A-hostile business, I give ’em one of these.
I’m for the guillotine … its an really effective deterrent.
and don’t forget cost effective.
It certainly is that!!
Continued in use in France up into the 1980’s.
Guillotines are messy and the blade needs sharpening every so often. You’ll get more politicians by the yard with a good supply of rope!
Hemp rope is abundant. Neck stretching is the way to go.
Nearly every time the NOT (Narrative Over Truth) Media reports on a fatal vehicle crash involving an ejection, they seem to feel obligated to highlight the fact that the victims were not wearing their seatbelts. Why does the NOT Media not feel the same obligation to highlight the fact that the murder victims were disarmed due to obeying “gun-free zone” laws? “No society can exist unless the laws are respected to a certain degree. The safest way to make laws respected is to make them respectable. When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing… Read more »
That’s because the MSM are actuallly the Commiecrat Party Ministry of Propaganda. Orwell called them “minitrue” (“Ministry of Truth”). They’re weapons of mass distraction!
Here is my understandings; An organization can restrict the carrying of a gun on their own property(properties). HERE IS THE CATCH. When an organization infringes on the RIGHT to carry for self defense, THAT ORGANIZATION NOW BECOMES TOTALLY RESPONSIBLE for DEFENDING the HEALTH and SAFETY of the now INFRINGED INDIVIDUAL! IF a shooting occurs, THAT organization CAN BE SUED for NOT FULFILLING THEIR DUTY to PROTECT!
I wish that it were true. If an organization like the state took away your freedoms against your will (e.g. arrest), then the state would be responsible for your welfare because they had taken away your ability to maintain your own safety.
.An organization like a store or restuarant, however, does not take away all your freedom nor is it mandatory that you go onto their property.
Nice idea. But I don’t think it would fly. I’ve read that firearms and edged weapons were prohibited in certain situations in the period prior to and immediately after the Constitution. The case where “safe zones” or other prohibitions against legal carry would transfer 100% of both the burden and liability for self defense to the private owner/leaseholder or the public owner (school, university, post office, government building, etc.) who prohibited such self defensive weapons would likely require either a SCOTUS decision at the Federal level, or a similar decision at the State level. It might also be successfully accomplished… Read more »
IMOA, unless there are metal detectors in a GFZ, concealed is concealed unless needed.
good argument; you being responsible for the death(s) in which you prevent another from defending themself from harm. although it will fall on deaf ears from the media industrial complex and progs who narrate to them. progs get away with any lie they tell because the media industrial complex will never challenge the narrative they are pushing. in fact, they are incapable of telling the truth, or they are unwilling to do so. i don’t want to mandate everyone carry a firearm to protect themselves, although it would be a good choice, it is a personal choice. so why do… Read more »
Gun Free Zone = Fish In A Barrel Zone.
Aw, Gabby Giffords….the Village Idiot of Gun Control as pimped out by her hubby.
If an entity bans self defense then they should assume any and all liabilities.
Politcians that pass gun infringements should be charged with Conspiracy (to) and Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law, both of which are federal offenses. If a state has 10 million residents, then that’s 10 million counts. Basically life in prison, which is exactly what they should get for being tyrants. If their infringements get innocent people killed, then impose the death penalty (as provided in statute). Easy-peazy!
It’s a gun free zone at that shopping mall, not a knife or any other kind of weapon free zone! Please read your copy off air thoroughly, before reading it on air.
They call it “tit for tat”. You charge the gun companies for someone else’s action that was illegal, we charge the ones responsible for creating gun free death zones and they get to pay all expenses including compensation for the loss of what that person would have contributed to the family unit and then 100,000 more for plain stupidity. If that were done, insurance companies would either not insure businesses or the stores would be paying a hefty price and if they tried to pass it on to the customer, Amazon is right at your fingertips for cheaper. FJB Trump… Read more »